Money Talks

by: Richard Allen Smith

Thu Aug 14, 2008 at 12:25:35 PM EDT


The military has traditionally been a bastion of Republican support.  This has always amazed me.  The majority of the military is recruited from the middle class, a traditionally progressive demographic. Historically, Democratic administrations have been the first to send the military to do the job they signed up for. Wilson led us in World War I, Franklin in World War II, Truman in Korea, Kennedy and Johnson in Vietnam and Clinton in the Balkans.

If I had to guess, I'd say that the "military=Republican" theory began during the Clinton years when the Gingrich brand of conservatism blamed Bill Clinton for reducing the size of the military, even though he was carrying out policy that was formulated and began its implementation in the Reagan and Bush (41) years.

But with this Administration conducting a war of choice, neglecting a war of necessity, destroying our military and refusing to care for our Veterans, it seems as though a sea change of political philosophy has washed across our uniformed services:

According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain's haul.

Wow. That's got to feel like a shot to the gut for John "I'm reluctant to talk about my service" McCain.  

So here is the take-away: deployed Soldiers would rather open their wallers for the candidate that says this:

Here is the truth: fighting a war without end will not force the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. And fighting in a war without end will not make the American people safer.

So when I am Commander-in-Chief, I will set a new goal on day one: I will end this war. Not because politics compels it. Not because our troops cannot bear the burden- as heavy as it is. But because it is the right thing to do for our national security, and it will ultimately make us safer.

than the candidate that says this:

I want to - and I want to tell you something, sir. I just finished having Thanksgiving with the troops, and their message to you is - the message of these brave men and women who are serving over there is: Let us win. Let us win.

I'm sure we are all for winning any task that is given to our military. But what neither MCain, nor any of the war cheerleaders, are doing is defining what victory would look like.  I'd wager that those Soldiers McCain talked to had something in mind other than what Senator McCain was thinking. And maybe that's why their wallets stay closed for the Senator from Arizona.
Richard Allen Smith :: Money Talks
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Money Talks | 35 comments
This is sweet ammo (4.00 / 2)
Good job Richard!  Troops donate 6:1 for Obama.  We all know where their votes will go as well.

"No U.S. soldier ever dies in vain because they're carrying out the missions of their commander in chief. And we honor all the service that they've provided." - Barack Obama
The Myth (0.00 / 0)
All those you folks know much more about the military personal today, from our time and much before and after the Grunts were Apolitical, if there were a support of a party ideology it came from the officer corps, higher ranks.

So I've always looked at the claim of Republican Support as a Myth concocted by the so called party that gives claim to 'Strong National Defense' which only meant Huge Defense Budgets and Silence from the Payers of, nary a complaint, possibly a shrug every now and than.

Well from the 12years of Republican Congressional Control, and Six controlling the Whole Shebang, which forced these occupations of choice and never Mentioned the Veterans Of, it's Their Definition Of a 'Strong National Defense', and look where the 'National Guard' are!!!!!!!!!!!  

'Hearts and Minds, "The ultimate victory will depend on the hearts and minds of the people who actually live there." -- President Lyndon Johnson

Madden 09 is out-- (4.00 / 1)
The one thing you can bet on is that if Madden were running for President, he'd have a sizable chunk of the military vote automatically.

troops are, almost to a fault, non-political...

defining what victory would look like (0.00 / 0)
Iraq to revive oil deal with China

'Hearts and Minds, "The ultimate victory will depend on the hearts and minds of the people who actually live there." -- President Lyndon Johnson
i think the military understands (4.00 / 1)
that all McCain offers is just more baseless ideology and  not actual leadership.  I mean, if you listen to the terms the Republicans use to define the so called end goals of their foreign policies you will hear victory, freedom, democracy and others.  These are all constantly evolving ideological concepts that continuously change from generation to generation and from individual to individual.  Heck, these concepts are changing every day here in the United States as we all know and it does not take a military force to make those changes. Some in the U.S. agree with the changes while others do not.  Its always that way no matter what nation you are in.  If you ask a person in the United States for example to define each of those terms you will get his/her own individual definitions.  If you ask another person, you will get slightly or even more drastic definitions depending on the person's personal point of view.  To change these ideals it takes time, must come from with in (and for some people their views will never change)  and they may or may not ever change no matter the form of foreign military intervention.  

Obama and Paul seem to also realize this  pointless Republican exercise.  They also see that those ideologies, no matter how one defines them comes directly from the United States itself (the beacon of freedom) and not from its use of military force.  So instead, they offer the military objectives based upon the tangible national security needs of the United States alone.  That is the way it should be.  I think they are right and so does the military it seems.

"Armed forces abroad are of little value unless there is prudent counsel at home."

Marcus Tullius Cicero 106 BC-43 BC

Well (0.00 / 0)
I certainly have respect for Paul. I do not remember him flip flopping once. Obama I am not to high on, but he is making more sense than McCain as of now.
[ Parent ]
You know... (0.00 / 0)
it'd be refreshing, in the spirit of bipartisanship, to have Obama name Ron Paul as his VP.  Despite their differences, I think it'd make a helluva "Change" ticket!
[ Parent ]
Yeah (0.00 / 0)
if Paul was still in the running, I would vote for him and contribute to his campaign. Other than him, about the only ones up there that I like are Hagel and Webb. There are a few others which I find tolerable, and the rest all suck in my book. Maybe Hagel will still get picked if Webb says no.  
[ Parent ]
I don't think Obama (0.00 / 0)
would pick Paul as his VP for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that Paul is a bigot.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Paul (0.00 / 0)
is not a bigot. I heard that story too, but I bet that was probably concocted by the elitist smear campaign. If he won't pick Paul, hopefully Webb or Hagel. Hopefully Webb changes his mind.
[ Parent ]
I don't think that (0.00 / 0)
you can call his publication that he released with his name on it "concocted by the elitist smear campaign".

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Sure I (0.00 / 0)
can. I doubt he wrote it and who is anyone else to talk. McCain hung with Falwell and Obama hung with Jeremiah Wright. Was what Paul did any worse?
[ Parent ]
Yes. (0.00 / 0)
Obama and McCain did not release racist material with their seal of approval on it as Paul did (notice I'm defending McCain here as well, so its not a partisan arguement). If I hang out with a racist, its a stretch to say I am a racist as will. But if I put out a newsletter called "The RockRichard Report" with racist rhetoric, then its not a big jump to make, and thats exactly what Paul did.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Paul (0.00 / 0)
was the best hope for America. Our elitist politicians don't have the guts or the brains to do what is necessary to destroy enemies like Al Qaeda. Nor do they have the sense to stay out of other people's affairs. Paul would actually challenge that, not to mention move us closer to actually being governed by the US Constitution. Imagine that.  
[ Parent ]
Yeah Paul is willing to use (0.00 / 0)
letters or mark and reprisal. That's his plan for fighting Al Qaeda. Thats not going to help anyone.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Yeah but (0.00 / 0)
none of the other candidates are willing to do what is truly necessary, from what I have seen. Yet they send our troops to fight them anyways. At least Paul would not send us over there in the first place. I would rather see us all stay here rather than go off to fight al Qaeda if we do not actually plan to destroy them. Paul was the best candidate. Not the best candidate in the history of the US, but the best of what we were offered. That is what I saw.
[ Parent ]
I don't (0.00 / 0)
even think we know what is necessary to defeat Al Qaida. Staying in Iraq as is is wrong. A surge in Afghanistan is wrong. I would say we hit Pakistan, but we don't even know for sure if the Waziristan area is AQ's center of gravity. They may not have a center of gravity at all. Do we know?? By the way, AQI does exist. Maybe it didn't exist before we went in, but they were in Fallujah. That is for sure. Then again, do we even know if Al Qaida means anything as a name for anyone. All it translates into is the Base. Truly a generic term. I think the name may be a disinformation tactic.
[ Parent ]
There is an insurgent group (0.00 / 0)
that the Bush administration and most of the traditional media refer to as AQI. But that group has never used that name, has never stated that they were part of real Al qaeda, and there are no proven ties to real al qaeda. So if that passes for legitimacy to you, then so be it.

And I still want to know what Paul's plan for destroying al qaeda is, besides issuing letters of mark and reprisal.

For anyone who doesn't know, that means Paul wants to fight bin Laden by sending pirates after him.

I'm on twitter.

[ Parent ]
They call (0.00 / 0)
themselves Tanzim Qaidat al Jihad fi Bilad al Rafidayn, which translates into Organization of Jihad's Base in the Country of Two Rivers. Same tactics, same ideology, and I bet at least some of them were trained by AQ. They pose a threat to Americans as well. That is assuming that there is a real Al Qaida in the first place. I bet they all are using the name because they know the value that Westerners put on the name and want to further complicate things. GPSC and the GIA are using the name as well now, Al Qaida in the Islamic Magreb, or something like that.  
[ Parent ]
Al Qaeda (0.00 / 0)
doesn't have a monopoly on islamic fundamentalism.  And the tactics were used in Iraq before they were used in Afghanistan, so you can't argue that they were exported from real Al Qaeda (which is in Iraq and Pakistan). And your bets hold no weight if you have no proof of real Al Qaeda training so-called AQI.  And I can verify from personal experience that Al Qaeda did really exist as recently as April.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Well I can (0.00 / 0)
verify AQI from personal experience so that means they both exist. Of course AQ doesn't have a monopoly on fundamentalism. Well there probably is a connection between AQ and AQI. Alot of the Arab Afghans left the region after the Soviets pulled out and started up groups in their own lands. There are hundreds of other, smaller Wahhabi groups out there. I bet they are funded by alot of the same people though. Probably rich Saudis. Or maybe European Muslims.  
[ Parent ]
Arab Afghans? (0.00 / 0)
Are you talking about ethnic Arabs, because there are no Arabic Afghan natives.

here is the CIA's information on Afghanistans ethnic makeup:  https://www.cia.gov/library/pu...

And are you personally verifying that a sunni insurgent group exists? Or that a group that calls itself AQI exists? I'm not sure which you mean here because you already acknowledged that there is no group that goes by the name AQI. You say there is probably a connection to real Al Qaeda, but where is your evidence? Also your bet that they are funded by the same people? Where is your evidence? I was hunting Real Al Qaeda last summer in Afghanistan, specifically Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri.

Here is a news article about it: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21...

You can talk about bets and probables all day, but right now your only making yourself look ignorant with a baseless argument. But hey, you are more than welcome to argue the easter bunny exists too.

And by the way, those links are called "sources". you should aquatint yourself with the concept. They are much more effective that terms like "I bet" and "probably".

I'm on twitter.

[ Parent ]
Arab Afghans (0.00 / 0)
is a term used to describe the Arab volunteers who flocked to fight the Soviets. Well, OK.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Zarqawi: The new face of Al Qaeda by Jean Charles Brisard.

http://www.pwhce.org/krekar.html

http://www.pwhce.org/zarqawi.html

http://www.globalterroralert.c...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/...

http://www.jamestown.org/terro...

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/w...

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/new...

I'll post some more when I get a minute. Go ahead and check out these names too.

Safr al Hawali

Salman al Oda

'Aed Al-Qarni

Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab

Ibn Tamiyya


[ Parent ]
Then again, (0.00 / 0)
Muchael Sheuer refers to bin Laden as an inciter in chief rather than a commander in chief. I think getting bin Laden now would be mainly symbolic. Not saying we shouldn't do it, but I highlu doubt there is a one hit KO to be had here.
[ Parent ]
By the way, quick question (0.00 / 0)
when you were over there, was the enemy you were engaging mainly Pakistanis and Afghans, or was there a large number of Arab and other fighters as well?
[ Parent ]
I was there (0.00 / 0)
from February of 2007 to April of 2008 and spent time in Kandahar, Helmand, Zabul and Nangahar.  Most of the fighters we encountered were Afghan and Pakistani with some Chechens and other foreign fighters mixed in the bag.  

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Yeah (0.00 / 0)
I actually saw Saudis, Kuwaitis, Syrians, and Iraqis in Fallujah. I also know that there were Chechens, because some of the guys fought a squad sized element of Caucasians speaking something that sounded similar to Russian that happened to be outstanding fighters. One of my OICs also recognized some of the tactics as "Chechen." IE: Their method of boobytrapping houses. One of my Iraqi friends in the IIF said he came across Algerians as well. There were also reports of Afghans, Pakistanis, Chinese, Moroccans, Libyans, Lebanese, Egyptians, Sudanis, Turks, etc. Were the Chechens the best fighters you saw?
[ Parent ]
I never knew (0.00 / 0)
where the people shooting at me were from, but whenever we were heading somewhere that was going to be tough it was always "these guys are the worst of the worst, foreign fighters from Pakistan and Chechnia."

Also, I remember also hearing of Uzbecs in our battle boxes as well. I think they said we would encounter some chinese in Musa Qala, but that could be a false memory.  It wouldn't be a stretch since, Afghanistan actually borders China.

I'm on twitter.

[ Parent ]
Yeah (0.00 / 0)
I don't remember any Uzbeks in Fallujah, but I have heard they are meaner than hell. Supposedly, the Chechens were in Fallujah to train the "mujahideen" on urban warfare tactics learned against the Russians, but I don't know that for sure. I also  remember one of the mosques was rigged to blow with 100+ daisy chained artillery rounds. These guys were pulling out every trick in the book.  
[ Parent ]
Well OK (0.00 / 0)
I do agree with your argument that we need to put more focus on Afghanistan. I say we pull the NATO guys out, and send in the Airbornes, the Marines, and more Spec Ops types. What is your idea for a solution in Afghanistan, Richard?
[ Parent ]
I was there (0.00 / 0)
from February of 2007 to April of 2008 and spent time in Kandahar, Helmand, Zabul and Nangahar.  Most of the fighters we encountered were Afghan and Pakistani with some Chechens and other foreign fighters mixed in the bag.  

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Winning!? (0.00 / 0)
Mission accomplished, all as they move the goal post over and over again.  Stopping at a logical and sane point does not mean losing.  Job well done RockRichard...I think I'll frame this.
Great post! (4.00 / 1)
Man I am glad to see that someone else was as confused as I about the apparently blind support that my fellow soldiers seemed to give the Republicans.  You've got to credit the Republican propaganda machine on this one.  But it looks like we are primed for a paradigm shift (YES!!!...I've always wanted to use that phrase!) in political thinking within the military.  I guess the message is that sending us to some unprovoked war overseas on multiple deployments and then not raising a finger to help us out when we return (oh and I'll go ahead and throw in the fact you were all to chicken@#$ to fight yourselves in Vietnam) does not do much to generate goodwill from the troops.  

Fantastic post...nice work RockRichard

Just had the BRAC 92 argument with my deployed kid. (4.00 / 1)
I would add that Ike running as a GOP influenced a big bunch of folks...[the Duke, Heston, and Reagan...]

Stars and Stripes reporting...Rush on the Radio...TV Channels on the Big Screens...

The assault on good public education in the 80s...

Counter influence is the Net and Blogs...
Talking about PTSD, etc and other Vet issues...
Troops dealing with 'shit'...

Well (0.00 / 0)
I am not donating to any of them. None of them deserve it.  
Money Talks | 35 comments
VetVoice on Facebook
VetVoice Recommends

"The War I Always Wanted,"
By Brandon Friedman

"The welcome mat for memoirs by veterans of operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom might never wear out so long as they write with the savvy of Brandon Friedman . . . Friedman's take is vivid, frank, precise and dramatic." --Military Times

"Add Brandon Friedman's The War I Always Wanted to the ranks of outstanding non-fiction produced by officers from elite combat units in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Always truthful, often excruciatingly so, The War I Always Wanted rises at numerous points to the level of literature." --Steven Pressfield, author of Gates of Fire

Buy The War I Always Wanted here.

"A Time To Lead,"
By General (Ret.) Wesley K. Clark

"A Time To Lead confirms the rewarding benefits of military service at a time when such service is experiencing considerable strain. It also includes a comprehensive description of America's current national imperatives, which deserve serious consideration." --General Alexander M. Haig, Jr., former Secretary of State

"This is a primer on leadership forged in battle and by decades of experience. . .This isn't just a book; it's a manual for leading people and living a good life." --Barry McCaffrey, General, USA (ret.)

Buy A Time to Lead here.

"Love My Rifle More Than You,"
By Kayla Williams

"Whip smart, sassy, with a mouth as foul as a sailor's, 28-year-old Sergeant Kayla Williams. . .tells what it's like to be a female soldier in Iraq." --Booklist

". . .echoes military memoirists from Julius Caesar to Ernie Pyle." --Publishers Weekly

". . .a shocking, on-the-ground view of one military woman's experience in Iraq." --Bookmarks Magazine

Buy Love My Rifle More Than You here.

"How to Break a Terrorist,"
By Matthew Alexander

"...a riveting, fast-paced account that reads like a first-rate thriller." --Publisher's Weekly

" ...an absorbing behind-the-scenes look at the secret intelligence war within a war." --Military.com

Buy How to Break a Terrorist here.
RSS Feed Links

Subscribe to VetVoice in a feed reader!

Subscribe to VetVoice by Email!
Diaries and comments at VetVoice do not necessarily represent the views of VoteVets.org. VetVoice will strive to remove any illegal material as soon as it is flagged. Similarly, VetVoice will use its discretion in determining whether to remove exceedingly offensive material. However, between posting and removal, any offensive or illegal material does not reflect the condoning or endorsing of said material by VoteVets.org or VetVoice.
Similarly, the views expressed on this website are those of the authors alone. Opinions on this website do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Defense or any of its components.
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:


Forget your username or password?

Front Page Writers
PTSD Resources
TBI Resources
IRR Information
Casualty Reports
VA Information
Support the Troops
Veteran Candidates We Support
Congressional Committees
Contact Your Elected Leaders
Sites We Like
Search

Advanced Search

Paid for VoteVets Political Action Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. VoteVets Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) organization which primarily focuses on nonpartisan education and advocacy on behalf veterans and their families. VoteVets Political Action Committee is a federal political committee which primarily helps elect Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran candidates and educates about veterans and military issues aimed at influencing the outcome of the next election.

Site Design: Articulated Man

VoteVets Political Action and Vote Vets Action Fund are separate organizations.

Powered by: SoapBlox